Monster: Lobster Knight

-

 


Most Mondays, I meet with friends at a local pub as we each do our various creative pursuits. I usually try to get some RPG related writing done (which has, among other things, resulted in my submission for the Barkeep Jam). 

Today, the results of my efforts is a monster, statted for His Majesty the Worm, because I think those statblocks are fun to play with right now. Without further ado, I present the Lobster Knight:

Lobster Knight

Beast Brute

 An aquatic menace that is not afraid to follow a foe (or prey) onto land. Of course, as mere beasts, these upright person-sized crustaceans are not truly knights, but their thick, prickly carapace has the look of a knightly plate armour.

Attributes: Swords 5 | Pentacles 2 | Cups 2 | Wands 2

Health/Defence: 4/6

Likes: An easy meal, murky water

Dislikes: Strong heat, being dry

Notes:

  • Tough. Actions that target the animate statue must exceed (not just match) its Initiative.
  • Aquatic.  The Lobster Knight can breathe and move unimpeded underwater.

Lesser Dooms:

  • Nutcracker. When the Lobster Knight Attacks on its turn, the target must always notch a piece of armour, regardless of whether the attack hits, (in addition to the normal effects of the attack).
  • Claw. On a successful Attack, if the Lobster Knight’s total Attack value is double the Initiative of the target, deal 2 Wounds.

Greater Dooms:

  • Resilient. Discard a greater doom card to automatically Recover from all effects. This action does not count towards the one card per turn limit.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Toppling the pillars of the OSR: against lethality

-
Image
  One of the accepted wisdoms in the OSR (as codified in e.g. the Principia Apocrypha ), as well at the NSR (as defined by Yochai Gal or Pandatheist) is that lethality is good, and a core component of OSR/NSR play, because it means that player choice has real consequence. I do not entirely disagree with this, but I also do not entirely agree. My opinion aligns more with Pandatheist's follow-up post , arguing that "consequential" would be a better term. Perhaps my brain is poisoned with modern "trad" ideology, but when playing longer campaigns rather than one-shots, I find that the characters tend to evolve beyond vehicle's for the players' problem solving, developing interesting quirks and personalities that it would be a shame to lose because of an unlucky dice-roll (because that is one OSR tenet I do still believe in - the sanctity of the dice result). A dramatic death because of calculated risk gone wrong, or a heroic last stand against an ogre whil
Read more

A method for condensed worldbuilding

-
Image
  An important part of playing role-playing games is a shared understanding of the fictional world. A common assumption is that the game master knows everything there is to know about the world, and the players know some subset of this. Of course, what the players know, and what their characters know might not always fully overlap, which can cause issues in the game. What happens when my diplomat character wants to talk about the different empires he has visited in his travels, but I, the player have forgotten, or worse, haven't been told about them? A common way of countering this problem is shared worldbuilding on the fly, having the GM share their power of "just making something up" with the players. However, this may not always be a satisfactory solution. Sometimes it is just nice to have a shared foundation to build on from the start, not having to nail it together while we are actually in the middle of some other encounter. Having a pre-existing idea of the world ca
Read more

Rules are a Safety Tool

-
Image
  I have recently been reading Fabula Ultima (more thoughts on that in a future post), and one thing that struck me is how often the rules text emphasises to not deviate from the rules-as-written unless everybody consents. This feels like a departure from the tabletop culture of allowing the GM to override the rules whenever it suits the game, or come up with their own house rules and expect the table to accept them. However, after further deliberation, it appears to me that this can be because the rules are a safety tool. Many people with more experience and knowledge and me have written about safety tools, so I will not go into deep detail here (see e.g. the TTRPG Safety Toolkit ), but one thing that seems generally true is that they only really work when everybody engages with them in good faith. They will not stop a problem player, who can easily ignore them, abuse them, or just generally cause an uncomfortable situation. What they are good for, is preventing those who want to eng
Read more